Session 018-04, Eichmann Adolf

With the Court’s permission, I now pass on to Prosecution
document No.1054. This is part of a speech by Alfred
Rosenberg on 7 February 1939, where he speaks about a
proposal to solve the Jewish Question by the establishment
of a Jewish reservation in Madagascar or Guyana. This was a
document of the Defence for Streicher No. 8 before the
International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg. It appears in
volume 51 of IMG on pages 545-547. I wish to submit these

Presiding Judge: T/118.

State Attorney Bar-Or: This quotation comes from the
Voelkischer Beobachter of 8 February 1939. With the Court’s
permission I shall read only one sentence from it. On page 2
it says:

“In conclusion, the Reich Commissioner dealt, in a wide
historic review, with the development of the Jewish
question since the emancipation of the Jews until the
present and stressed that for National-Socialism the
Jewish question in Germany will be solved only when the
last Jew will have left the territory of the German

I beg to submit Prosecution document No. 782. It is quoted
from the Document Book in Nuremberg Trial No. 9 against
Ohlendorf. It was Defence Document No. 221 of 25 January
1938, regarding the way in which police authority should be
used to imprison people who are under control of the
authorities, in concentration camps. I draw the Court’s
attention to several of its instructions. I request to
submit copies of the document. I might add that already
before the trial against Ohlendorf and Pohl* {*Case 9 of the
subsequent trials was United States v. Otto Ohlendorf et al.
(Pohl’s was Case 4).} the document was Exhibit U.S.A. 207
before the Nuremberg International Tribunal and was
submitted by the American Prosecuting Authorities as
document PS-3040.

Presiding Judge: This will be exhibit T/119.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I wish to draw the honourable
Court’s attention to paragraph 1, on “Admissibility”

“Protective custody can be ordered as a coercive
measure by the Gestapo in defence against tendencies
hostile to the State and the people, against persons
who endanger by their behaviour the existence and the
security of the people and the State. (2) Protective
custody may not be ordered for penal purposes or as a
substitute for penal imprisonment. Criminal acts are to
be tried by the courts.”

Paragraph 2 – Authority (Zustaendigkeit):

“(1)Only the Gestapo is competent to order protective
custody. (2) Application for an order of protective
custody must be addressed to the Gestapo through head-
units or units of the State Police. All requests are to
be substantiated in detail: the allegations of the
arrested person must be set out. A copy of the
interrogation of the provisionally arrested person must
be forwarded immediately. (3) Protective custody may be
ordered only if the accused has first been heard on the
charge against him.”

Paragraph 6 – Implementation (Vollstreckung):

“In principle, protective custody is to be carried out
in the concentration camps of the State.”

In this matter, Your Honour, I have yet another document
which cannot be submitted properly without attaching another
document which I shall have to prepare after the
intermission, because the second document to which I shall
refer was submitted to the Accused. If the Court agrees, I
would suggest that we pause now.

Presiding Judge: What do you intend to do after the
intermission, to present more documents?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I wanted to complete the picture in
respect to Austria and then to continue with witnesses who
will testify on Czechoslovakia.

Presiding Judge: As you wish. Is there another series of

State Attorney Bar-Or: Yes, there is another series. I am
at your disposal: I can start with the second series now and
return to this series later.

Presiding Judge: We shall have to digest these documents
sometime. It would be better do it in the order you

State Attorney Bar-Or: I think that the order we proposed
will make it easier to digest them.

Presiding Judge: We shall pause for 20 minutes.

State Attorney Bar-Or: With the Court’s permission, I have
meanwhile prepared the required copies for submission of
those documents I did not have time to submit during the
first part of the morning session. I shall turn to these
now. First, Prosecution document No. 262, of which I said
represents an “Organization plan of the Head Office for the
Security of the Reich (RSHA)” as it was confirmed at the
time by Hoettl and Ohlendorf. It was submitted to the
Accused and is part of T/37 under No. 243. The Accused
expressed his opinion, his affirmative opinion, on this plan
on pages 3011-3015 of the statement. Here are three copies.

Presiding Judge: This will be T/120.

State Attorney Bar-Or: And now Prosecution document No.
1168 which was submitted to the Accused and represents part
of T/37 under No. 298. The Accused saw this document and he
speaks about it on pages 3420-3424 of his statement. It
originates in the Alexandria 4 microfilm. I shall submit
three copies.

Presiding Judge: This will be T/121.

State Attorney Bar-Or: The dictation mark is again Ech/D.
It is a report of a journey by SS-Hauptscharfuehrer
Eichmann, II 112. I shall quote only two short passages:

“According to orders” (writes Eichmann) “I was in
Nuremberg from 6 September to 9 September 1937, to get
in touch with visiting foreigners.” On page 2: “In the
evening of 8 September from 21.00 to 22.00 hours,
Gauleiter Streicher made a speech to the group of about
100 members of the Weltdienst – World Service – in
Hotel Kaiserhof to which I was invited by party-member
Wurm, the chief editor of the Stuermer.

And now to Prosecution document No. 84 – it is the SS
Member’s oath which appears in T/37 under No. 163. It was
submitted to the Accused and the Accused speaks about it in
his statement on pages 2060-2062. I am submitting the

Presiding Judge: This will be T/122.

State Attorney Bar-Or: This is the text of the oath of a
member of the SS:

“I swear loyalty and valour to you, Adolf Hitler, as
Fuehrer and Kanzler of the Reich. I vow obedience to
you and the superiors you appoint, until death. So help
me God.”

And now, with the Court’s permission, I shall proceed with
document 1185 that was submitted to the Accused and appears
in T/37 under No. 297. It is a report on the reorganization
of the Department under II 1 of the SD Head Office. It is
dated 12 December 1937. It was submitted to the Accused and
the Accused speaks about it on pages 3416-3420 of his
statement. Here are three copies.

Presiding Judge: That will be T/123.

State Attorney Bar-Or: With the Court’s permission I shall
read several passages from this report. It says here about
the Accused’s Department II 112 in the period prior to 1
April 1937:

“Real action against the Jewish enemy by Department II 112
started toward the end of 1935. By then the preparatory work
had reached a point where a review of the organizations of
the Jews in Germany had become possible. This work which
took more than a year to complete, could have been concluded
in several months, if only it had been divided better, from
the start, within the Department. As a result from the
former division of work in the Department some were
overburdened with day-to-day jobs, while others lacked
comprehensive knowledge of the subject.

“Practical contact with the Jews in Germany was at that
time almost non-existent because of clumsy tactics of
the heads of the Department. In general, the work
followed the guidelines of the State Police unit in
Berliln, which, of course, had knowledge only of the
local organization of the enemy. During the few
interrogations that took place at the State Police
unit, the men of Department II 112 had no opportunity
to be practically involved. They were carried out
exclusively by the State Police officers. Political
supervision of the Jewish organizations operating in
Germany according to State Police standards was of
course impossible under the circumstances; there was
not even supervision of the activities of the leading
Jewish political personalities. This situation lasted
until about March, April 1937 (Report from SS-
Untersturmfehrer Eichmann).”

And now the section on Department II 112 after 1 April 1937:

“From that time on, all decisions on Jewish matters are
taken in close coordination with Department IIA4. By
regularly summoning the leading personalities of the
Jewish organizations, it is being attempted to direct
Jewish policy in such a way that the emigration of
Jews, in particular of those without means, will be
increased and speeded up.”

And on page 3:

“The ultimate aim, as will be set forth in more detail
in a report to C” (Commanding Officer Heydrich), “is to
concentrate all work on the Jewish question in Germany
in the hands of the SD and the Gestapo. Signed: H.

The Accused confirms the signatures, by initials, on page
3415 of his statement.

And now to Prosecution document No. 2, the report on the
journey of SS-Hauptscharfuehrer Eichmann and
Oberscharfuehrer Hagen to Palestine-Egypt. It is dated 4
November 1937, was written in Berlin and bears the dictation
marks HG/Pi. It was submitted to the Accused and is part of
T/37 under number 8. We find the words of the Accused
beginning from page 341 of his statement. Here are the three
copies. With the Court’s permission, I shall only read short
passages from this comprehensive report.

Presiding Judge: Who wrote the report, the Accused or Hagen?

State Attorney Bar-Or: It says here Hg and we may assume –
in any event formally – that the report was written by Hagen
or dictated by him.

Presiding Judge: Was Hagen higher in rank than the Accused?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Yes. In his statement, the Accused
says two things. Firstly, that in respect of the division of
functions at the SD Head Office, rank was of no importance,
but function was. It happened that men with a lower rank
were the superiors of men who had a higher rank.
Furthermore, the Court will find handwritten corrections in
the report and the Accused confirms in his statement that
these corrections are in his handwriting. With the Court’s
permission, I shall read from this report only short
passages that have a bearing on our matter.

Presiding Judge: This will be T/124.

State Attorney Bar-Or: On the journey, it says in chapter I:

“The journey, which was made with the Gruppenfuehrer’s
consent, began on 26 September 1937 at 08:50. The route
went through Poland and Rumania. From the port of
Constanza, we continued with the steamer ‘Romania’ on
29 September 1937 at 0:00. Istanbul, Piraeus, Beirut
and Haifa were ports of call. We arrived in Haifa on 2
October at 18.00 and met, as arranged in Germany, on
the same day and the next day with the DENB*
{*Deutsches Nachrichtenbuero – (German News Agency)}
representative from Jerusalem, Dr. Reichert.

The ship left Haifa on 3 October and arrived at
Alexandria on 4 October at 09.00. On 7 October, the
journey was continued by train to Cairo. On the 12th,
13th and 14th, we tried to obtain an entry visa for
Palestine, where we wanted to meet Dr. Reichert. The
visa was refused, probably because of the disturbances
that broke out in Palestine on 15 October. We left
Cairo on 9 October at 06.45 by train to Alexandria. As
the steamer was delayed by one day, we stayed overnight
again at the home of our acquaintance, Henri Arcache,
and left Alexandria finally on 20 October at 11.30
with the Italian steamer ‘Palestina.’ We called at
Rhodes on the 21st and at Piraeus on the 22nd. The
steamer arrived in Brindisi on 23 October at 23.00 and
we had to pass the night there. The journey continued
on 24 October at 08.43. On 25 October at 11.20 we
crossed the Swiss border, and at 19.00 of the same day
the Austrian border at St. Margareten. We reached
Lindau at 21.00. The journey continued on 26 October at
06.07, to Munich, where we arrived at 10.00. We arrived
at the Berlin-Anhalter station at 23.00.”

I proceed to page 31:”…

Presiding Judge: The pages we have are not numbered.

State Attorney Bar-Or: We shall try to obtain for the Court
after the Session the serial number of our reprint from
which I am reading to make things easier. I read from page

“From the economic point of view, Palestine offers a
dreary picture. We were told, for example, that the
chief means of payment are bills of exchange which
nobody honours, but which are nevertheless transferred
as a means of payment, even when they are entirely
without value, because protesting the bill is most
often without avail. Drafts drawn on the Templar banks
are considered the most secure type of money, as these
are the only financial institutions that can pay.”

“This economic chaos in Palestine is to be attributed
chiefly to the fact that the Jews cheat each other, as
there are no Aryans around with whom they can do
business. Typical of the total ineptitude of the Jews
for ordinary economic activity in their own country is
the fact that in Jerusalem alone there are said to be
40 banks, thriving on the deception of members of their
own race.”

I now come to page 33, second paragraph:

“Promotion of the Emigration of Jews from Germany. To
further promote the emigration of Jews from Germany,
the Jew Polkes proposed to make possible the emigration
of 50,000 Jews per year with 1,000 Sterling per head,
by means of an increase in the transfer of goods
through Paltreu (Palaestina Treuhandstelle der Juden in
Deutschland)* {*The German Office of the Ha’avara
Company for the transfer of Jewish property from Nazi
Germany to Palestine.} and “Nemico” (Near and Middle
East Corporation). The goods would be sold in
Palestine, Iraq, Turkey and in Peria. Immigration to
Palestine would in this case be possible without the
special consent of the English Mandatory government
since Jews with 1,000 Sterling are considered as so-
called capitalists.”

“Opinion This plan must be rejected by us for two
reasons: (a) It is not our aim to have Jewish capital
transferred, but rather, in the first place, to induce
Jews without means to emigrate. Second, the
aforementioned emigration of 50,000 Jews annually would
in the main strengthen Judaism in Palestine, and
considering that according to the policy of the Reich
the establishment of an independent state of the Jews
in Palestine should be prevented, this plan cannot be a
subject for discussion.

(b) An Increase in the transfer of goods to the Near
and Middle East would mean that these countries would
be lost to the German Reich as ‘countries supplying
foreign currency.’

Furthermore this would strengthen the ‘Ha’avara system’
(Jewish companies for the transfer of capital of Jews
emigrating from Germany), which was nurtured by the
Reich Economics Ministry and to which we are opposed.”

Judge Halevi: Who is Polkes in whose name he quotes all

State Attorney Bar-Or: Polkes was a Jew with whom the
Accused says he was in touch.

Judge Halevi: That means a Jew from Palestine?

State Attorney Bar-Or: At that time he was in Palestine.

I now proceed to Prosecution document No. 460. It originates
in the German Foreign Ministry reels prepared by Professor
Verete. The Accused speaks of this document in his statement
on pages 1733-1742. This is a letter from Goering, in his
capacity as Commissioner for the Four Year Plan, of 24
January 1939 to the German Minister of the Interior in
Berlin. I submit the document in three copies.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/125.

State Attorney Bar-Or: And this is what Goering writes to
the Minister of the Interior in Berlin:

“The emigration of the Jews from Germany is to be
furthered by all possible means.

In the Ministry of the Interior a Reichszentrale fuer
die Juedische Auswanderung is being established,
composed of representatives of the departments
concerned. It is the task of the Reich Central Office
to deal, uniformly for the entire territory of the
Reich, with:

1) all measures for the preparation of increased
emigration of the Jews, among other things to induce
the establishment of a Jewish organization suitable for
the uniform preparation of applications for emigration,
to take all steps to endure the provision and
appropriate use of funds in this country and abroad,
and to determine, in coordination (Zusammenarbeit) with
the Reich Office (Reichstelle) for Emigration, the
suitable countries for the emigration.

2) to direct the emigration, among other things, by
giving priority to the emigration of poorer Jews.

3) accelerating the emigration in individual cases
(“Einzelfall”), by procuring rapidly and without
friction, by means of centralized processing of the
application for emigration, the necessary papers and
certificates required by the individual emigrant and
supervising the implementation of the emigration.

The Chief of the Security Police will take charge of
the management of the Reich Centre. He will appoint the
responsible officers and organize the operation of the
Reich Centre. Reports on the work of the Reich Centre
will be regularly forwarded to me. Measures involving
decisions of principle require a prior decision on my

In addition to the representatives of the departments
concerned, Ambassador Eisenlohr will also be appointed
to the Committee to be in charge of official
international negotiations, and Ministerialdirektor
Wohltat to be in charge of the negotiations on the
Rublee Plan. Signed: Goering”

Last-Modified: 1999/10/10